Re: [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-14.txt> (Requirements for Time-Based Loss Detection) to Best Current Practice
tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com> Thu, 28 May 2020 11:37 UTC
Return-Path: <ietfa@btconnect.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B1833A0DB2; Thu, 28 May 2020 04:37:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id puIzeQNFEAll; Thu, 28 May 2020 04:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR03-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr30099.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.3.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21ED63A0DAF; Thu, 28 May 2020 04:37:56 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=GBZtyX/pTL86UupL8/4icKuY6ngTu4apQQhQ1U/+DKRBnDp/u/010wmite2PNMaGxkIoA4+oVO/rq9Tr8k+asOQxmnsVO2G/oznPhKz3GtsUnmUylmQvtukacLgq4+PbPCVIDV2nkHuLxFAUWqWdbQW6Aybg0mHOrDaochyYIHlD9yvOMWJXiGs0VYADjT6DtsV08bsaekd8rOKvTmJjGfaLu0CJUkVF0GD3AV1B89yKyiH9dClsz24F0P9cmC5N6f3UMBvBsPmrO9ZZshX6J4bFkJzhcwwRsj2xlwfnYPEoQsrXvxDjcD2zItWtt2e3DGQVwYskxwpp3unTvw3Z6g==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7c9Y1qC6rWUhjpqJp8AR3tZlBMWXbTmKDXNMgW7Q7UY=; b=Zb4jOjq+JHMooFzxQGL9CfxC9R4ADjRClUn7b0WnPZK66KNxLRkUfRhj0rYp1UrTTYKWZz21dAqyYzdeM90inhoR0bERNR9zjpR1WHJrVml1H65b1b6W8ivaunlqf87h9SIN9PhVbxIPvF6dtAIzM2ikqLLaj+uv/0EHPMmRNehw9CgbeuGCWDBP9YrCvkYlX/ihFD3dwsp48bibiCjNsJ06cZmWxMMZhmc0DR0IO+6bLyB4KqiwL1POkV9wINNqd6JbaOInaQs0mxQ/jfW0XjD+o2mvBEr5OZFadB1jA14BbAUdzwXQVGrF5W8uUcaVCQ/0aKzQDz7cUyuhpeqHKA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=btconnect.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=btconnect.com; dkim=pass header.d=btconnect.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-btconnect-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7c9Y1qC6rWUhjpqJp8AR3tZlBMWXbTmKDXNMgW7Q7UY=; b=VA28CmktsNBSl8gVclkFgmqrHUHbdjwNd7HX4Ll4+oKBFyWjrcj8VlKsQjgu0J+s8BxPzfibGissOkEKyLHtP+agRKwiO3rhp9BTANkmaX+NkdsPzgvdfMARb1EEr9zaTOfb3P5hzZm2whod+zXKYFMcjnWP4zKUZPR0JHywPkg=
Received: from DB7PR07MB5340.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:10:69::25) by DB7PR07MB5735.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:10:54::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3066.7; Thu, 28 May 2020 11:37:54 +0000
Received: from DB7PR07MB5340.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6d73:b879:b380:bed4]) by DB7PR07MB5340.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6d73:b879:b380:bed4%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3066.007; Thu, 28 May 2020 11:37:54 +0000
From: tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>
To: "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
CC: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider@ietf.org>, "tcpm-chairs@ietf.org" <tcpm-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-14.txt> (Requirements for Time-Based Loss Detection) to Best Current Practice
Thread-Index: AQHWLR8TwR0U4MaFY0Oh73nrwMQPbai9bZHJ
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 11:37:54 +0000
Message-ID: <DB7PR07MB53406A74483D8123C75ADD70A28E0@DB7PR07MB5340.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <158981133458.2481.15195759097492819350@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <158981133458.2481.15195759097492819350@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=btconnect.com;
x-originating-ip: [81.131.229.108]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 870813ee-ee02-484a-422b-08d802fb8f97
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DB7PR07MB5735:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DB7PR07MB573595B4C30A39BB4CFAEC3AA28E0@DB7PR07MB5735.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0417A3FFD2
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: GvfeEuqu/ygcy0XuTIN5XalNPw4KvhbSBVhzYT/6e3jKshChhLMFVyJO6fafE09ZEQ9tfPtKeN9OuON3ICMMWRN71TM4yCc6/0uD9+XXOwxUjC9rHWbqs0yznvsLGaeHtf6a+cEQ9rezXJsWh1a/+hvHgAJQmOTgNHIz0lx5Sjma0YqVYywSjrN+MjHk/9s7zEO9pOUWkuSZJ1Egu7hjtPV3hkV8aMa69bfV3f6kt7BhpW7NAum3fOkkXaN/Y619vCXGWN3Mt5aD+4ZJBp+CCec5kLeYXmo4pioH+Jan0Z5d6w2vFYjdKa7r78iiAt1XMOo4p9lv2BB8OpsSGTq8kr9Si20M+Ikg8zKVfkBXHIHdil1P1k3eidG08hPZ34Bfy3eUk/B/UbukMw6gk/uJvw==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DB7PR07MB5340.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(39860400002)(366004)(396003)(376002)(346002)(136003)(9686003)(26005)(86362001)(2906002)(8936002)(478600001)(66574014)(186003)(54906003)(316002)(6916009)(966005)(83380400001)(450100002)(66946007)(66476007)(64756008)(91956017)(7696005)(66446008)(33656002)(4326008)(76116006)(52536014)(8676002)(55016002)(71200400001)(5660300002)(66556008)(6506007)(53546011); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: yd6eBM7uz4VaInt2H9XaJhDwvJQ5PIhZ7T3gVS6TqsDifAcDpzqxU1wB4phJg4Mc3SiIF020jwT24Wc4W7wNIVKjveHQm0j1s1aRaMCtUwnQdTTzpfOkyO2UZYYz6KtZ2B3Jp1GXgfIrAfJNmoECpef6k8KC0BugA57Vby1egYCFgad2Qey8+YmDvFMUVa2RpmDlIUE0GOgP2HhSWJPEhaTDJp7cYhp2KVpPfqI6+LcNS0RH2JE6KOPvb2XTGOkYdGMvHtdo6RFycXNleC/IkZK4bwDv0NGoQxhr+rz2KjEZlaZUW6teSvsUGJWR6LFnOQn6OHC7F5KXf+VfxIaWg20msWHQo0mT/tzrgV118VKpXE+vWzKj5omgyCqfQo07JGwZXENZNQ2iVWClR5LaxwKSHYIjZMVxCl82x4rne/FzSfAK7C384D+8FSi9YwAXTda10Ss1peP7htZg2y0eGeigJUyc4SbKXB/y1d9sbwXW3IJW2sqQ95EddLIfNcyR
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: btconnect.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 870813ee-ee02-484a-422b-08d802fb8f97
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 May 2020 11:37:54.1247 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: cf8853ed-96e5-465b-9185-806bfe185e30
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: K4ZxzoyUOld/vK9C9mZYw9cfjFFyxwPSt4D1FhbKeDIVLU5yzmMhpGW4i84L6hEDiETbspo3T/T3THxvaaYyQg==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB7PR07MB5735
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/VXxfC9sTEGJuMvf3Si5SzpnhCHk>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-14.txt> (Requirements for Time-Based Loss Detection) to Best Current Practice
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 11:38:00 -0000
Looking at this takes me back. The format of the references is not one I have seen in a long time, likewise the running footing, the front matter and the placing of the Abstract while Terminology is also from a bygone age. Ah, I see that the I-D is a decade old - all is explained but I do think that an update is called for. Tom Petch ________________________________________ From: tcpm <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Sent: 18 May 2020 15:15 To: IETF-Announce Cc: tcpm@ietf.org; draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider@ietf.org; tcpm-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-14.txt> (Requirements for Time-Based Loss Detection) to Best Current Practice The IESG has received a request from the TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions WG (tcpm) to consider the following document: - 'Requirements for Time-Based Loss Detection' <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-14.txt> as Best Current Practice The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2020-06-01. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract Many protocols must detect packet loss for various reasons (e.g., to ensure reliability using retransmissions or to understand the level of congestion along a network path). While many mechanisms have been designed to detect loss, protocols ultimately can only count on the passage of time without delivery confirmation to declare a packet "lost". Each implementation of a time-based loss detection mechanism represents a balance between correctness and timeliness and therefore no implementation suits all situations. This document provides high-level requirements for time-based loss detectors appropriate for general use in the Internet. Within the requirements, implementations have latitude to define particulars that best address each situation. The file can be obtained via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. _______________________________________________ tcpm mailing list tcpm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
- [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-1… The IESG
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consid… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Martin Duke
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… tom petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… t petch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Joseph Touch
- Re: [tcpm] [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcp… Wesley Eddy